By Kris Osborn
Gen. George Casey is running an army that has been stretched ever further by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, that is working to repair and replace war-worn equipment, and that is pushing ahead with a massive modernization program - the Future Combat Systems - to create a mobile, medium-weight networked force.
Casey, who took the Army's top uniformed job in April 2007, had previously served as commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, where his command of Multi-National Force-Iraq lasted from 2004 to 2007. He is a former commander of the 1st Armored Division; his Pentagon jobs included stints as Army vice chief of staff, director of strategic plans and policy on the Joint Staff, and director of the Joint Staff.
Casey spoke to Defense News during a May visit to the BAE Systems plant that is assembling FCS's Non-Light-Of-Sight Cannon (NLOS-C).
Q. How are things going in Iraq, and how long will U.S. troops be there?
A. This is a long-term proposition. I believe we will have a presence there for a long period of time. The size of the force may vary, and I don't suspect we will be there five to 10 years from now at the levels we are at now because the Iraqi Security Forces are developing their own force.
What I see happening in Iraq is gradual progress across the board, most notably in security situations. Prime Minister [Nouri al-]Malaki's movement of Iraqi Security Forces into the south, into Basra, I think, is one of the most significant things that has happened in the last several years. You have a largely Shia Army against Shia militia. It is something that had to be done. The fact that the prime minister had the courage to do that on his own is a huge step forward, and it is sending strong signals across Iraq that the government represents all Iraqis.
Q. What are some of the biggest challenges for FCS?
A. Sustaining support for the program over these next two critical years, I think, is probably our greatest challenge. That is why it is important that the real capability is coming out now. It allows us to show that what we have been working on for the last decade is starting to bear fruit.
Q. What were your impressions of progress made at the BAE facility?
A. What I saw today is a program that, in the course of its development, may allow us to accelerate what we are doing with the Future Combat Systems program. It has been a little while. People were getting impatient and tired of looking at slides. That is one of the reasons this is so important. It shows the reality of where we are.
The other thing is Fort Bliss, Texas, where we have soldiers that are using and testing five FCS systems. The development of that technology has put us in a position where we think we can accelerate systems that are very relevant to the needs of our soldiers and get them into their hands quicker than we originally thought. There is always risk in developing programs, but I have never been one who felt that the technology would not come through on time.
Q. What parts of FCS can accelerate?
A. The five systems I am talking about are the Small Unmanned Ground Vehicle, Unattended Ground Sensors, one for urban and one for tactical, NLOS-LS [Non-Line-of-Sight Launch System], MAV [Micro Air Vehicle] and the first increment of the network.
How fast? We are not sure yet, but by the end of the summer, we will be much better informed. But the fact that they are in the hands of soldiers now, and that soldiers are testing them and making recommendations about how to change them, accelerates the process. When I was a brigade commander, a colonel, my brigade was the one who tested the M1A2 tanks. The first thing they did was put it in the hands of soldiers so they began giving feedback.
Q. How will FCS help with conventional and irregular warfare?
A. It is as relevant to the fight that we are fighting today in Iraq and Afghanistan with its ability to apply precision fires as it is to a fight in major conventional operations. It is exactly the kind of system we need. The operational package is on the common chassis right now. They have already fired 2,000 rounds out of it down at Yuma.
Q. What are the advantages of the NLOS-C?
A. First of all, it has a two- person crew. A normal howitzer has a four-person crew. This system can fire six rounds in a minute. That's a lot of firepower. You can process a mission in less than 30 seconds, so that also is a big benefit against moving targets. It is precision fire. It can hit an armored formation moving across the desert or it can hit a house with limited collateral damage effects on the other side.
Q. How would the NLOS-C help in Iraq?
A. With beyond-line-of-sight, you can hit a target that is on the other side of a hill that you can't see. That's critical in Iraq.
What we are seeing in Iraq is that the ability to precisely apply fires, particularly in cities, is a critical element of being able to operate in 21st-century warfare. Sixty percent of the population in the world is going to live in cities in 2030, and when military operations will take place around cities, we can't blow up a city to save it. If you think of Sadr City in Baghdad, it is about a 3- or 4-kilometer square. When it comes to precision fires, you can hit a house and not damage the houses beside it. That is a big difference in what we are able to do.
Q. What is the NLOS-C procurement timeline?
A. The first eight will be out into the field, into the testing area this year, and in about another two years we will have another eight and they will be in the hands of soldiers at Fort Bliss, Texas. Then, six NLOS-Cs will be purchased in 2010 to be followed by six more in 2011 and 2012.
Q. Can FCS Manned Ground Vehicles be fielded early?
A. I think it is a little too early to tell, but I am heartened by what I am seeing and what I just saw. It would be my desire that as technologies appear, they lend themselves to acceleration.
The hybrid-electric technologies of this system, I think, are borderline revolutionary. I saw this a year or so ago out at Santa Clara, [Calif.]. The engine is on the side of the vehicle, on the left rear of the vehicle. It is about three-quarters the size of Bradley [armored vehicle] engine. All it does is generate electrical power. One, you don't need as much fuel. Two, it is very quiet. We watched it drive by today and 100 yards away you could not hear it, which is significant. We're still working on storage capacity of this; as a technology, it needs to come up a little bit more, but I think there is huge potential with the hybrid electric drive.
Q. How will NLOS-C improved technologies help vehicle maintenance?
A. The common chassis will have great impact on the reduction of the logistical support footprint required, and when you have fewer people and fewer logistics requirements, you have fewer people on the road.
We saw during a tour of the plant the advances that have been made in design technologies. We saw a vibrator machine that basically simulates the vibrations that a vehicle would have in 20 years of life. It has already identified faults that have been corrected. It is all diagnostics. The driver has a screen that pops up and tells him if you have a problem, you can fix it now or you need to fix it in two or three hours. That reduces the number of support people that have to be fielded to take care of the system.
Q. When the Army orders its next batch of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, will it go with lighter MRAPs or heavier MRAP IIs?
A. Our leaders there [in theater] are in the final throes of a process to figure out, OK, what is the right mix, what is the right type? They've had almost 5,000 in theater and they have had a chance to work with them and experiment with, for instance, one Humvee, two MRAPs. I expect we will hear from them in the next several weeks. ■
By Kris Osborn in Fridley, Minn.
2008 budget: $130 billion
2008 procurement budget: $23.8 billion
Troops: 1,032,400
Major development efforts: Future Combat Systems, Joint Tactical Radio Systems, Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles
Source: Defense News research
The Army's Future Combat Systems (FCS) program is ready to test a few components that soldiers may have in their hands by 2010.
Help
